My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2002-08-30_REVISION - M1986015
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1986015
>
2002-08-30_REVISION - M1986015
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:49:33 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 3:49:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1986015
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
8/30/2002
Doc Name
Request for additional extension of consideration
From
Southwestern Ecological Services
To
DMG
Type & Sequence
AM1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Southwestern Vegetation Analysis <br />Ecological Wetland Ecology <br />SerV~ees Land Rehabilitation Planning <br />Photodocumentation <br />37 East Colorado Avenue Denver, Colorado 80210-3105 (303) 722-9067 Fax 1303) 778-8937 <br />August 30, 2002 RECEIVED <br />Jim Dillie ~ AUG 3 0 1002 ~ <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />Room 215 Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />RE: Request for additional extension of consideration for Pueblo East Pit amendment. <br />Permit Number: M-1986-015 <br />Dear Jim: <br />In behalf of my client, Transit Mix of Pueblo, it is requested that the decision date for this amendment application <br />be extended by another 90 days. It is not likely that much time will actually be needed. As noted in my recent update <br />letter to yourself, there was a hearing on the well permit objection. It appears that a settlement through a stipulation <br />is close at hand, but as the current decision date is September 3, 2002, it does not appear likely that full agreement <br />will be completed by then. Furthermore, if the settlement is not accepted then the hearing will continue followed by <br />decision periods and appeal periods. This doesn't appear very likely, but just in case, we believe that 90 days should <br />be sufficient to conclude this aspect. All other aspects appear to be in good order. <br />Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions, please call. <br />Sincerely, ~v <br />~~"(- '~ <br />Mark A. Heffner <br />f2.-z,o~ <br />cc: Jerry Hermans, Transit Mix <br />Mark Klune, Transit Mix of Pueblo <br />Mike Sayler, Bishop-Brogden Associates <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.